kcjenkins

Washington, D.C. (December 22, 2014) By Roger Russell Next month, the IRS will auction off Darryl Strawberry’s contractual right to receive payments under his deferred compensation agreement with the New York Mets. Strawberry owes a tax debt for the years 1989, 1990, 2003 and 2004. The U.S. had valid and subsisting federal tax liens against all property and rights to property belonging to Strawberry, including the right to receive payments under the deferred compensation agreement, according to the District Court for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee Division. The minimum bid for the sale is $550,000. The sale will be held on Jan. 20, 2015 by the IRS Property Appraisal and Liquidation Specialists unit, which may, if the minimum bid is not met or exceeded, hold a new public sale and reduce the minimum bid. Twenty percent of the bid is required to be deposited with the acceptance by PALS of the high bid in the form of a certified or cashier’s check. The agreement is worth about $1,279,000, according to the IRS.

This contains some great points that apply to ALL, OF ANY AGE. I thankfully avoided most of this as I had the several years after Don's stroke,to sort things, but still had a few of these issues bite me in the butt. Letter written by a wife after her husband's death in an accident "Few things I learnt after my husband's death:- We always believe we will live forever. Bad things always happen to others. Only when things hit us bang on your head you realise... Life is so unpredictable.... My husband was an IT guy. All Technical. And I am a chartered accountant. Awesome combination you may think. Techie guy so everything is on his laptop. His to do list. His e-bill and his bank statements in his email. He even maintained a folder which said IMPWDS wherein he stored all login id and passwords for all his online accounts. And even his laptop had a password. Techie guy so all the passwords were alpha-numeric with a special character not an easy one to crack. Office policy said passwords needed to be changed every 30 days. So every time I accessed his laptop I would realize it's a new password again. I would simply opt for asking him 'What's the latest password' instead of taking the strain to memorize it. You may think me being a Chartered Accountant would means everything is documented and filed properly. Alas many of my chartered accountant friends would agree that the precision we follow with our office documents and papers do not flow in to day to day home life. At office you have be epitome of Reliability / Competent / Diligent etc but. At home front there is always a tomorrow. One fine morning my hubby expired in a bike accident on his way home from office. He was just 33.His laptop with all his data crashed. Everything on his hard disk wiped off. No folder of IMPWDS to refer back to. His mobile with all the numbers on it was smashed. But that was just the beginning. I realised I had lot to learn. 9 years married to one of the best human beings. With no kids. Just the two of us to fall back on. But now I stood all alone and lost. Being chartered accountant helped in more ways than one but it was not enough. I needed help. His saving bank accounts, his salary bank accounts had no nominee. On his insurance his mom was the nominee and it was almost 2 years back she had expired. But this was just a start. I didn't know the password to his email account where all his e-bill came. I didn't know which expenses he paid by standing instructions. His office front too was not easy. His department had changed recently. I didn't know his reporting boss name to start with. When had he last claimed his shift allowance, his mobile reimbursement The house we bought with all the excitement on a loan thought with our joint salary we could afford the EMI. When the home loans guys suggested insurance on the loan. We decided the instead of paying the premium the difference in the EMI on account of the insurance could be used pay towards prepayment of the loan and get the tenure down. We never thought what we would do if we have to live on a single salary. So now there was huge EMI to look into. I realised I was in for a long haul. Road accident case. So everywhere I needed a Death certificate, FIR report, Post Mortem report. For everything there were forms running into pages, indemnity bonds, notary, and surety to stand up for you. No objections certificates from your co-heirs. I learnt other than your house, your land, your car, your bike are also your property. So what if you are the joint owner of the flat. You don't become the owner just because your hubby is no more. So what if your hubby expired in the bike accident and you are the nominee but if the bike is in a repairable condition. You have to get the bike transferred in your name to claim the insurance. And that was again not easy. The bike or car cannot be transferred in your name without going through a set of legal documents. Getting a Succession Certificate is another battle all together. Then came the time you realise now you have to start changing all the bills, assets in your name. Your gas connection, electricity meter, your own house, your car, your investments and all sundries. And then change all the nominations where your own investments are concerned. And again a start of a new set of paperwork. To say I was shaken. My whole life had just turned upside down was an understatement. You realise you don't have time to morn and grieve for the person with whom you spent the best years of your life. Because you are busy sorting all the paper work. I realised then how much I took life for granted. I thought being a chartered accountant I am undergoing so many difficulties. What would have happened to someone who was house maker who wouldn't understand this legal hotchpotch A sweet friend then told me dear this was not an end. You have no kids. Your assets will be for all who stand to claim. After my hubby's sudden death, I realised it was time I took life more seriously. I now needed to make a Will. I would have laughed if a few months back if he had asked me to make one. But now life had taken a twist. Lessons learnt this hard way were meant to be shared. After all why should the people whom we love the most suffer after we are no more, sorting some paperwork before we go will at least ease some of their grief. Check all your nominations: It's a usual practice to put a name (i.e. in the first place if you have mentioned it) and royally forget about it. Most of us have named our parent as a nominee for investments, bank accounts opened before marriage. We have not changed the same even years after they are no longer there with us. Even your salary account usually has no nomination. Kindly check all your Nominations. Bank Accounts and Bank lockers Fixed Deposits, NSC Demat Accounts Insurance (Life, Bike or Car or Property) and other Investments PF Pension Forms Investments: Every year for tax purpose we do investments. Do we maintain an excel sheet about it. If so is it on the same laptop of which the password you had not shared. Where are those physical investments hard copy Passwords: We have passwords for practically everything. Email accounts, Bank accounts, even for the laptop you use. What happens when you’re next in kin cannot access any of these simply because they do not know your password... Put it down on a paper. Will: Make a Will. I know you will smile even I would. Had I not gone through all what I did? It would have made my life lot easier. A lot less paperwork. I wouldn't have to provide an indemnity bond, get it notarized, ask surety to stand up, no objections certificates from others... Liabilities: When you take a loan say for your house or car. Check out on all what ifs. What if I am not there tomorrow, what if I lose my job? Will the EMI still be within my range? If not get an insurance on the loan. The people left behind will not have to worry on something as basic as their own house. My battles have just begun...But let us at least try and make few changes so that our loved ones would not suffer after we go. We do not know what will happen in the future. But as the Scout motto goes: "Be prepared" NEVER TAKE LIFE FOR GRANTED DO THINGS APPROPRIATE FOR THE ONES WHO DEPEND ON YOU WITH LOVE

I would amend to report the interest. Agree with Tom on the sale.

Here is the link for ALL the IRS Webinars http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/Webinars-for-Tax-Practitioners-1

That is a great link to bookmark. I am surprised New Mexico has only one location?

1065, and don't apologize for the act that the law makes the legal protection cost a bit more in tax prep. Indeed, you will be helping them maintain that "protective wall" by filing the 1065

Pacun, I think you missed the point. 1. She has already discounted the fee. The client has insulted her by not only not paying, but disputing it "my usual charge, according to her". That's on top of paying very late. 2. The client is [as a client] a true PITA. "She consistently provides info in small pieces, constantly scrapes for every deduction, pays very late and in several amounts, and more. This year she wanted to meet twice for planning purposes and multiple times changed various amounts (mileage, office expense, etc.)." Either one might be overlooked, but combined they are simply unacceptable stressors. It is not about Margaret's costs, it's about her peace of mind, and reducing the stress of what is already going to be a stressful season. She does not owe this client anything just because the client has problems in her life.

http://www.komando.com/tips/286251/check-your-pc-for-hidden-government-surveillance-software/4

The very MOST you should do is mention LegalZoom.com I would not do that without serious warnings, and urging them to discuss with an attorney.

Option 1 seems to describe the transaction quite reasonably. The lender did not cancel the debt, He accepted payment.

Prosecutors Drop IRS Civil Forfeiture Case Arnolds Park, Iowa (December 15, 2014) By Michael Cohn Federal prosecutors in Iowa have agreed to drop a controversial civil asset forfeiture case in which the Internal Revenue Service seized nearly $33,000 from the owner of a Mexican restaurant whose cash deposits at her bank had aroused suspicion of criminal activity. The government moved to drop its case against Carole Hinders, who owned Mrs. Lady’s Mexican Food in Arnolds Park, Iowa, after hearing her sworn testimony last week, according to the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm that represented her in the case. In this case, the government will return all of the nearly $33,000 it seized from Hinders in 2013. The Institute for Justice teamed up with her in October to clear her name of any wrongdoing and get her money back. However, the firm said the IRS is asking the court for the right to refile the case in the future and repeated its claim that the case was justified. The Institute for Justice plans to file a response, asking the court to deny the government any right to refile its case and clear the way for Hinders to get interest on the money that was seized. “I actually wanted a trial, which would have cleared my name and helped to protect others, but it is good to get the money back,” Hinders said in a statement. “My fight is far from over, though. I am willing to tell my story to Congress to help change forfeiture laws so that no one else has to go through what I suffered.” She may already have some support in Congress. Last week, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee filed legislation to protect taxpayers against the inappropriate use of civil asset forfeitures by the IRS (see Congressmen Introduce Bill to Curb IRS Civil Asset Forfeitures). Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, also plans to introduce legislation in the Senate to curb the practice. Grassley is expected to become chairman of the Judiciary Committee in the next Congress. He is a senior member and former chairman and ranking member of the Finance Committee, with jurisdiction over the IRS. “I’m working on civil asset forfeiture reform legislation to introduce in the new Congress,” he said in a statement Monday. “News reports including those in The Washington Post have detailed aggressive seizures of cash and property from drivers. In the case of the Iowa restaurant owner and others like it, the IRS has now adopted an enforcement policy under which it won’t seize assets under the structuring law without evidence of underlying criminal activity unless there are extenuating circumstances. I’m looking at ways to make sure the IRS and other federal agencies’ use of these statutes are reformed permanently going forward. Since the IRS changed its approach in these cases, it could change its approach again, and the same is true for other agencies. It’s important to look at getting the right policies set in statute going forward. The government’s power to seize assets should be used fairly and with common sense. The reforms I’m developing are meant to curb instances in which government power unfairly infringes on the rights of motorists, small business owners and other Americans.” The IRS had seized Hinders’ money under the assumption that she had structured her restaurants bank deposits to keep them under $10,000 to avoid federal bank reporting requirements. Banks are required to file Suspicious Activity Reports if they see large cash deposits coming in over $10,000, but law enforcement also looks for patterns where depositors seem to be attempting to keep the deposits under the level required for the reporting. However, the IRS has indicated that it will not pursue new cases so aggressively. The case has received significant attention from the press, including The New York Times and Des Moines Register. Hinders owned and operated Mrs. Lady’s Mexican Food for 38 years. The restaurant only accepted cash, which meant she made frequent cash deposits at the bank. Federal law requires banks to report cash deposits larger than $10,000. Since her deposits were less than $10,000, the government claimed she was deliberately making small deposits to evade the reporting requirement. The IRS seized Hinders’ money using civil forfeiture, which allows law enforcement agencies to take cash, cars and other property without even charging the property owner with a crime. Carole has not been charged with a crime. The government has never claimed that any of the money that it seized from Hinders’ restaurant is the proceeds of illegal activity—only that civil forfeiture law allows them to seize money merely suspected of being involved in crime. “The IRS should not be raiding the bank accounts of innocent Americans, and it should not take a team of lawyers more than 18 months to get it back when they do,” said Institute for Justice attorney Larry Salzman in a statement. “This case again shows why civil forfeiture laws have become one of the most serious threats to private property rights in the nation.” “Instead of simply returning the money with interest and an apology to Carole for the nightmare they put her through, the IRS is shamefully attempting to mask their retreat by insisting on the right to refile the case in the future,” said IJ attorney Wesley Hottot. “This was an outrageous abuse from the start and the government should recognize that.”

The damage would be the cost of a legal battle, both past and future. Non-taxable.

First, I would send her a pleasantly worded past due letter for the $200. That may end it all by itself. But regardless of the social connections, she is abusing the relationship. And you are unintentionally encouraging that by letting her get away with it. It is, you admit, 'draining', so whether you collect or not, I'd drop her for the resulting lowering of stress. A letter in Jan telling her you are cutting back some, and will no longer be able to do her return, would be my follow-up.

I hope you all not only write your Reps and Senators, but also Letters to the Editor of your local paper, supporting this Bill. We need to gin up as much support as possible to end this abuse.

Washington, D.C. (December 11, 2014) By Michael Cohn The Republican and Democratic leaders of the House Ways and Means Committee have introduced bipartisan legislation to protect taxpayers against the inappropriate use of civil asset forfeitures by the Internal Revenue Service. Ways and Means chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., and ranking member Sander Levin, D-Mich., introduced the Taxpayer Protections Against Abusive Seizures Act, which would provide taxpayers with protections against the inappropriate application of civil forfeiture laws. The laws were enacted to curtail money laundering and terrorist activities, but a recent report in The New York Times found they have also been used to seize funds from some small businesses, in some cases leaving business owners with no working capital to make payroll and maintain needed inventory. “In America, a citizen suspected of a crime is innocent until proven guilty,” Camp said in a statement. “All too often, however, our current laws allow the government to assume guilt without allowing the accused a speedy hearing, depriving them of much needed working capital. This bill provides average American small business owners the ability to challenge powerful government agencies like the IRS, and guarantees them their day in court.” The laws are designed to prevent a practice called “structuring,” the act of making small cash deposits to avoid the $10,000 bank-reporting threshold that is commonly used by drug dealers, money launderers and terrorist entities to avoid detection by authorities. The laws authorize the government to seize the funds of those found engaging in structuring, and in the instance reported in The New York Times, there were inadequate opportunities for the business owner to challenge the seizures. The legislation would provide that an affected person, within 14 days of receiving a notice of a seizure, could request a court to hold a probable cause hearing within 14 days of such request. In addition, the bill provides that if no hearing is held within 14 days of such a request, or if the government fails to show probable cause, the seized funds would automatically be returned to the individual. “This legislation would give law-abiding taxpayers— including small business owners—an opportunity to challenge a notice of seizure and ensure that the IRS is acting appropriately and within the law,” said Levin. “Taxpayers have the right to due process when their property is seized, and this bill protects that right.”

Without any way of knowing, not being there to discuss it with the parties, the term 'damages' does seem to imply that portion was compensatory rather than punitive.

Washington, D.C. (December 12, 2014) By Michael Cohn The Internal Revenue Service released a revenue procedure Friday providing rules for the nationwide rollout of post-appeals mediation for both Offer in Compromise and Trust Fund Recovery Penalty cases. The IRS Office of Appeals originally launched post-appeals mediation for both types of cases as a pilot program that was available in certain cities in December 2008 and is now expanding the program nationwide. Post-appeals mediation is available to help resolve disputes after unsuccessful negotiations with the IRS Office of Appeals and is available for both factual and legal issues. The mediator’s role is to help the parties reach their own agreement collaboratively, but the IRS noted that the mediator does not have settlement authority over any issue. Appeals officers trained in mediation techniques will serve as mediators at no cost to taxpayers, however. Taxpayers also have the option of paying for a qualified non-IRS co-mediator. Taxpayers or the IRS Office of Appeals are able to request nonbinding mediation for eligible cases, but the taxpayer can decline the IRS Office of Appeals’ request for mediation. The goal is to complete the process within 90 days after the mediation request is approved. Eligibility criteria and complete procedures for initiating a post-appeals mediation request for both examination and collection issues are in Revenue Procedure 2014-63, which will be published in Internal Revenue Bulletin 2014-53 on Dec. 29, 2014. For more information on post-appeals mediation, visit the Appeals Mediation Programs page on IRS.gov.

It's not the first time, and likely not the last, but we will always take action when it happens.

That is a sale, no matter what they called it.

Some real good points made.

Yes, he's inheriting from Mother, so how she acquired it, and what her basis was, is irrelevant. Only relevant if she gifted it to him while alive.

A bit more detail, please. What is the relationship between the various parties?

It can only be elected on a timely-filed return, so he will have to carry back the loss from those two years. If he has another loss in 2014, he can elect to forgo the carry back on that year's loss but that will have no effect on the two older years.